The invalidity of the famous Darwinist claim that ''useful mutations do exist.''
The invalidity of the claim that mutations miraculously give rise to evolution
Why are the claims about genetic drift invalid?
Synthetic Evolution Theory, The
Sickle Cell Anemia
Regulatory Gene
March 29 2018, 22:16
November 11 2017, 13:05
October 26 2017, 22:01
They will see in Hell how mutations make beings ugly and defective. Everything will look bad as if they were subject to mutations.
99% of mutations are harmful and 1% are ineffective. It is scientifically explained that even those 1% ineffective mutations are proved to be harmful in the long term.
Evolutionists confess that the probability of a useful mutation is like shooting at the motor of a car and expecting it to work better.
Mutations are detriments that occur in the genes of the living beings. Mutations cannot bring about a new species or cause one to evolve into another.
In hell, the bodies of those who advocate evolution and creation by coincidence will look malformed and distorted as if they were created through mutation just the way they claim to exist in this world.
Eyes are miraculous organs. They claim that they come into being as ordinary organs as a result of mutations. An ordinary process cannot be the cause of their existence. An ordinary process can only make you blind. Mutations can only make you unable to walk. Mutations can only cause blindness, deafness. They can only destroy existent systems and do nothing else.